Ask HN: Does your employer want you to state pronouns in email signature?

No and I wouldn't if they asked.

I don't think gender has any bearing on how one performs their job and to promote such a thing could do more harm than good.

When I see someone with their pronouns on twitter I usually don't engage with them. People who do this more often than not tend to make everything about gender politics where it would otherwise be irrelevant.

It's viewed by some as a political matter, but in reality, the intent is to ensure that everyone feels comfortable sharing their pronouns without making people feel awkward. So by mentioning my own (he/him), I'm enabling a non-cis person to share theirs without them feeling odd about it, which boosts inclusivity.

That's the intent. I haven't done it yet (I probably should), but while I don't see neutrality towards stating pronouns in the following manner, I do see resistance from people around stating pronouns as being potentially motivated by bias. Inclusiveness boosts work output from everyone, and assuming peoples' pronouns is a rapid way to alienate a measurable population of workers to a degree that could impact their success.

Of the three east coast firms I've worked in the last six years, I've seen it recommended at two. I've seen it dissuaded at zero.

Edit: made the change on HN. I did it on Twitter some time ago apparently. It's also interesting watching the points swing on this. I suspect it's equivalent to corona masking in a way: common usage of pronouns reduces exposure to hatred by non-cis folk much the way usage of masks reduces exposure to covid-19 and complications by vulnerable folk.

Im an employee at a company (400 employees US) has an article in internal homepage suggesting all employees do, executives do it, most employees dont though

Wow that is amazing.

> How widespread this is across industry?

Not very widespread.

> Do you think this is a good/bad initiative?

Extremely bad initiative. It would seriously make me question whether or not I would want to stay at that employer. Of course I wouldn't set any pronouns and refuse it if they required it.

I am eagerly waiting for the ultra left-leaning HN crowd to downvote me to oblivion!

I work with two small non-tech consultancies. For one, some of us are doing this (informally) with support from management. In emails signature, zoom calls, mural/miro screennames etc.

For another, we do this internally but not externally. We work with a tremendously, broad spectrum of people to generate social good. Some of these stakeholders would not receive this well, but at the same time actively invest time and money on key common areas (be it women's health to child mental health).

So in this organization, I think we would have to think throughly about the potential to alienate some stakeholders that sets us back on other social good activities.

My company encourages everyone to create an "operating manual" that includes things like preferred pronouns. Not required at all, but helpful to avoid missteps.

Since the pronoun movement I've found myself avoiding pronouns altogether. For example instead of "team, welcome Jane. She is our new lead designer. She previously worked at acme corp" I would say "team, welcome our new lead designer Jane who previously worked at acme corp"

My current view is that I do not give pronouns as I assume an interlocutor will use a good-faith assumption, and I react appropriately if they are wrong. It helps that I have a traditionally-male forename. I do not conflate others' pronouns with their sexual orientations or preferences as they are rarely any of my business.

If I'm asked I am not uncomfortable to state my pronouns and I consider such a question to be perfectly cromulent.

If someone proffers pronouns I take great care in using them correctly, as I do the spelling of their name and how they express any title they may have. What's in a name? Respect is part of the answer.

Only if we have specific pronouns we want others to use. The biggest value it provides is saving that uncomfortable conversation where you correct/are corrected when first meeting someone.

I am from Georgia, (the country not state). My coworkers are generally LGBT neutral or friendly, never heard anything bad from anyone. I personally attend most pro-LGBT rallies. In our language, the Georgian language, there is just one pronoun for all genders, so we don't care. I personally consider enforcing others' choice of specific words in their speech a generally questionable practice.

No. I'm on th East coast in a solidly liberal area, and the only time I've ever seen pronouns listed outside of twitter was the staff name tags at a college graduation.

I work in tech, not politics

My small employer has made no mention of the subject, and since my coworkers are ideologically diverse it would cause conflict if they did.

I think it's worth stating pronouns if a significant fraction of the people you work with have nontraditional ones. If it's just a tiny fraction, or none, it isn't worth the trouble. Like, if you're the only kosher person in a workplace it shouldn't make it necessary to partition food according to kosher law in the office kitchen, but it may be if the majority are keeping kosher.

A "significant fraction" is of course in the eye of the beholder. But maybe we can agree that it's somewhere between 1% and 50%.

I am LGBT and not in favor of it being pressured or de-facto compulsory. I would hope it was popular enough that people understood what it meant so that trans people can have more acceptance and understanding. I don't have it in my email signature, but if my company released a policy saying it was acceptable, I might add it. I would probably not add it without management permission since it is their choice how they want to present their brand to their clients. I think strongly pushing it on straight people is more likely to create a backlash and create a counter-movement.

Some have put theirs in. I would if they asked or made mandatory. It's not something I personally care for or otherwise want to spend time and energy being bothered by it. I will however, if it means showing a small sign of support for those that do. As is, my signature is just my name. I don't understand the rebellious approach for something so trivial imo.

Fairly uncommon in conservative US business. I'm torn on the matter between viewing it as corporate virtue signaling--which it absolutely is--while also considering the benefit of leveling the field for people who wish to avoid being misaddressed or awkwardly correcting others.

Diversity questions aside, some given names are ambiguous. Some names are not, but may have different (assumed) genders depending on the language. In those cases it may be helpful to add a "Mrs"/"Mr" or similar, just to save people the embarrassment of addressing a woman as a man or vice versa. And isn't a "Mr"/"Mrs" a sort of pronoun spec as well? You're saying "use the usual pronouns for females/males".

I’ve seen this forced at larger companies and Universities. I’m neutral on the topic of stating pronouns — could somebody with more knowledge explain the difference between including pronouns and age/sex/race/religion/ethnicity?

From my understanding, usage of pronouns is about not making any assumptions and being inclusive. So I’m just not sure what or where the line is.

It’s not required but our internal profile system supports listing your pronouns and people are encouraged to list them. I think most people have set their pronouns too. This is at a well known financial services firm.

Some application forms give a “Decline to state” option, and as far as I know that does not imply any latent bigotry. Now that I think of it, that’s going to be my literal answer if it ever becomes compulsory, as a Decline-To-Stater. Much of the Clojure community on Twitter does pronouns and I proceed with caution.

People can use the limited space to make whatever impression they like, is my thought... I maintain a one page resume after 20 years and know the value of space, and that’s strictly how I’d approach it.

We are not required to do this by business, however there is now state legislature that requires that any job posting must include explicit naming of genders male/female/diverse. That is männlich/weiblich/divers in German (m/w/d abbreviated, you will find it on every job posting or you face serious fines).

Most people call it männlich/weiß/deutsch already, which translates to male/white/German.

I don't think it is a good initiative. Acceptance cannot be enforced and this is something that gets on peoples nerves. The gender activists constantly try to create new spellings and words and I have never seen it adopted naturally aside from places where it is enforced.

Maybe it will come with time, but people only started to not give gender a second thought.

I also think this kind of legislation is created by people that are behind the general population on topics like gender, where everyone has their own opinions, which is completely fine.

I am a white cis male. Normalising the statement of preferred pronouns is very important for people who's gender identity differs from their assigned sex at birth. I state my pronouns on both my social media and work emails.

Your statement of being "LGBT / neutral" seems strange to me, being neutral on whether other human beings should have the same rights I enjoy does not seem to be something I can be neutral on. I accept that myself and others with privilege must help create a more equal society for everyone, even in the relatively small changes such as stating our pronouns.

What does this mean in practice? Add what?

Disclaimer: Not from US, not English speaking natively...

I work at a very left-leaning SV unicorn. Most people don’t advertise their pronouns, but quite a few do. I’m mildly peeved by this. To me the practice feels like taking off one’s lower body half garment to expose the genitalia. “See? This is my gender.” What difference does this make in a professional context? Our culture has put so much emphasis on treating all genders (or no gender) exactly the same: that was the right thing to do. Then why should we be wallowing in who has what and how they use it? It’s an irrelevant distraction. Do the job, go home, and be whatever you want.